Dear Jonathan,
After discussion with colleagues, our iterations lead us to:
*ratio_of_upwelling_radiance_emerging_from_sea_water_to_downwelling_radiative_flux_in_air (sr^-1)
(If it is fine for CF, that is the solution we prefer.)
With
**"angle_of_incidence"
With
***"angle_of_emergence"
Is that OK for CF?
Cheers,
Olivier.
-----Message d'origine-----
De?: Jonathan Gregory [mailto:jonathan at met.reading.ac.uk] De la part de Jonathan Gregory
Envoy??: mercredi 28 octobre 2009 16:53
??: olivier lauret
Cc?: Frederic MELIN; Laurence Crosnier; cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu; Andrei LINTU; cristina.tronconi at artov.isac.cnr.it; Philippe Garnesson; Ludovic BOURG; Yann BARZIC
Objet?: [CF-metadata] Sea water transparency and reflectance.
Dear Olivier
I think Frederic's suggestion implies the name should be
ratio_of_upwelling_spectral_radiance_emerging_from_sea_water_to_downwelling_spectral_radiative_flux_in_air (sr^-1)
Both numerator and denominator are spectral (units with m-1 for per wavelength
interval) but that cancels out, so the ratio does not have m-1, as you say. But
it does now include the word "spectral" (twice!) as you originally suggested.
Equally it could be argued that spectral should be omitted from the ratio.
Which what you would prefer?
> Concerning the geometry of observation, we could introduce "angle_of_incidence" as suggested by Jonathan, plus probably something like "azimuth_angle"?
What about angle_of_emergence? I assume both angle of incidence and angle of
emergence would be defined wrt the normal to the surface.
Cheers
Jonathan
Cliquez sur l'url suivante
https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/BSklraEEWNbTndxI!oX7UkjnxLIPhzY6s8id0aRvVZFZmRMXdiqj3K6V!Lah5YhHo1Oe2QXkTzz63Umxp4EWgA==
si ce message est ind?sirable (pourriel).
Received on Fri Nov 06 2009 - 03:37:15 GMT
